Surendra Singh, J. - (1.) CASE called out. None appears to press this application even in the revised list.
(2.) HEARD learned A.G.A. and perused the lower court record and impugned judgment and order of acquittal. The challenge in this appeal is the judgment and order dated 8.6.2000 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur in case No. 2964 of 1999, Ram Nath Vs. Smt. Lalmani Devi and others acquitting the respondents of the charges under Sections 147, 323, 149, 447, 506, IPC. Brief facts of the case are as follows: - Ram Nath, the complainant and the husband of the applicant Smt. Sita had filed a complaint with the allegation that grandfather of the respondent No. 1 namely, Ghasiyawan on 1.6.1981 executed a sale deed in favour of present appellant Smt. Sita Devi regarding a land situated in Mohalla Sahab Ram. On 3.10.1990 the accused -respondents at about 12.00 noon having armed with lathi, ballam and katta came to the aforesaid land of the appellant, locked the gate of the boundary by putting soil over the same and extended threats to the appellant that they will not permit her or her husband to enter in the said land and simultaneously they also beaten Ram Nath, the husband of the appellant by bricks and fists. They have further extended threat to the aforesaid appellant to take his life, if the appellant or her husband would take any action against them. It was alleged that due to the aforesaid threat extended by the accused persons the FIR could not be lodged at the police station. However, a complaint was instituted and the case proceeded as a complaint case. The complainant in order to prove its case has produced himself as PW -1, Mahendra Singh as PW -2, Islam as PW -3, Shambhu as PW -4 and Syed Nazir Hussain as PW -5. All the witnesses invariably have deposed contradictory statements before the trial court. Whatever they have deposed was against the stand taken by the complainant in his complaint and for this reason the trial court did not rely upon the evidence of such witnesses.
(3.) TO my mind, the trial court has rightly come to the conclusion that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the guilt of the accused -respondents beyond the shadow of doubt and have rightly acquitted the respondents from the charges levelled against them.;